The performance of gender roles surrounding weddings subtly reinforces a foundation of unequal gender treatment. Traditionally gendered wedding aspects are generally oriented around the female, although a few exceptions extend to both members, and exist primarily in heterosexual relationships. Society tends to infuse preconceived notions about men and women’s roles into the activities surrounding a wedding; through performing traditionally gendered wedding rituals, a foundation of unequal treatment of the two genders is being subtly reinforced.
One of the most prominent examples of the imbalance of gender equality is how certain rituals are historically based on the belief that women are the property of men. For instance, it is considered respectful for a potential husband to ask the father of the potential bride-to-be for his daughter’s hand in marriage. This originates from when daughters were seen as the property of their fathers who handed them off to a husband. While history can’t be changed, asking the bride’s father for permission to marry a woman who is old enough to marry, and therefore old enough to make her own decisions, is outdated. A more modern approach is to request the blessing of both parents. Similar to a man requesting the father’s permission to marry his daughter, the bride being lead down the aisle by her father is another long-standing tradition that undermines the capability and independence of women. This tradition has its origins from when weddings were viewed as transactions; the father was quite literally "giving away" his daughter as a piece of property to another man. This action further supports the idea that daughters belong to their fathers, and men in general, as they are passed from the possession of one man to another. As an alternative, the bride can ask both parents to give her away or ditch the parental accompaniment and walk down the aisle alone.
An example of a pre-wedding ritual that undermines both genders is the idea that only men can propose. Typically when the woman of the relationship proposes, it's perceived as her demanding dominance in the relationship, removing the masculinity of the man, and prematurely forcing commitment in a relationship that wasn’t ready for the next step forward. This exclusivity suggests that men are the ultimate decision-makers in the relationship, reinforcing the male as holding a position of power over women. This limitation is also unfair to men as such a ritual requires the purchase of an engagement ring, placing a financial burden on one partner without having a guarantee that the investment will be well received. Additionally, it suggests that a man’s capability of providing for his future wife relies primarily on income. This notion presents an initial view of marriage as based on financial sacrifice rather than love. Furthermore, the origin of engagement rings lies in monetary gains rather than relational ones; A "Real Man's Ring": Gender and the Invention of Tradition authors write that “The groom’s ring only became a tradition in the United States when weddings, marriage, and masculine domesticity became synonymous with prosperity, capitalism, and national stability… male engagement ring campaigns drew on a gendered understanding of tradition, one that served to legitimize new consumer rite.” While marriage proposals can mark a significant advancement of the couple’s relationship, the focus should be on the relational aspect of the proposal rather than the ring itself, regardless of who pops the question.
Another example of wedding rituals reinforcing gender oppression is present in the general questioning of a woman’s value in comparison to men. It is typically understood that the bride’s parents are responsible for financing the wedding, which originates from the idea of a dowry; the bride’s family was required to buy the bride’s position as a wife to allow her to enter into the groom’s family and to finance the beginning of the couple’s new marriage. This payment signified that women were not capable of providing for themselves and were unworthy of being accepted into a new family without a financial incentive. Presently, women are capable of earning their own money and aren’t required to pay off their relatives for becoming a new member of the family, although no doubt this money would be accepted with open arms by most recipients.
In addition to the bride’s family paying for wedding arrangements, it is a common occurrence that a wife takes her husband's last name in place of her own. While couples today have alternative motives for exchanging names, the origin behind the reasoning was that a woman's name was not as valid as a man's name. The Feminist Bride writes that the wife taking her husband’s name was done for inheritance reasons; “children from the marriage needed to have their father's last name to claim things like an estate, savings, etc. The last name was the way courts established paternity between fathers and children.” To avoid questioning which partner’s name carries more validity, which is less applicable in the modern age, both spouses can keep their last names and consider hyphenating the two names for their children.
While not hosted by all brides-to-be, bridal showers are commonly held to celebrate the engagement. Although this event appears harmless, if not empowering for the bride, Examining Wedding Rituals through a Multidimensional Gender Lens: The Analytic Importance of Attending to (In)consistency author Emily Fairchild writes otherwise; “Bridal showers establish a structured and specific way for the women participants to do gender via gift-giving, bridal-themed games, and informal interactions. The parties typically reinforce domestic work as women’s work, and brides are expected to play the corresponding feminine role, even if it does not fit their interests or identities.” The notion of domestic housework being reinforced by these showers is present in the gifts the bride often receives, including items such as cleaning appliances and cookware. While pressing housework solely onto women is inequitable, this also presents a dilemma for men. Add Men, Don’t Stir: Reproducing Traditional Gender Roles in Modern Wedding Showers author Beth Montemurro writes that “men who do women’s work are often subject to teasing and questions about their masculinity and sexual orientation since they are feminized by such work, as are women who do men’s work about their femininity, sexual promiscuousness, and sexual orientation.” To solve this dilemma, bridal showers can be turned into “wedding showers” to acknowledge both members, give attention to the couple equally, and divide domestic chores between both the man and woman.
Another aspect that affects both members are the often bride-exclusive details of wedding activities and planning, such as the bridal shower situation discussed above. Even though weddings represent a marriage of two individuals, it seems that all the attention revolves around one member: the bride. Additionally, the bride is usually responsible for wedding planning while the groom makes minimal contributions. No one has ever congratulated the groom for his fine taste in the invitation stationary or choice of the venue’s flowers. While this situation may place sympathy on the groom, it also means that the bride is usually tasked with all the necessary arrangements for planning the wedding, an intense source of anxiety. Additionally, authors of “It's the bride's day”: The Paradox of Women's Emancipation, Ursula Froschauer and Kevin Durrheim, write how this uneven labor in the wedding workload can be a precursor of an unequal division of labor in the future marriage; “the way couples do their wedding planning may influence how they later negotiate household and domestic tasks in their marriage relationship… Conforming to traditional gender roles in couple relationships reinforces the unequal status of women in public life but presumably leads to greater stability in marriage.” This unequal status paired with an increase in marriage stability produces a false illusion of equality. Additionally, Fairchild writes that “References to the wedding as the bride’s occasion and comments from grooms suggest the bride is more invested in the wedding, reflecting the notion that weddings are women’s purview and women should be accorded more attention during the ceremony.” Weddings are about the union of two individuals and that should be reflected through equal attention and spotlight provided to the couple.
Various examples of gendered symbolism are ever-present in wedding rituals. One such example commonly included is in the first look at the bride as she walks down the aisle. “Oohs” and “aahs” are chorused as the bride is spotted in a white dress more or less like every other bridal gown seen before. This comes as no surprise as 83% of brides in 2018 wore a white dress on their wedding day (Brides). This long-standing tradition exists from when white dresses signified the bride’s purity, specifically regarding her virginity. And the bouquet she’s holding? Those calla lilies were initially meant to represent her fertility. While this symbolism may be less intended today, white is still symbolic of the bride’s “innocence” entering into a marriage, although flowers are now purely for aesthetic purposes. An alternative to white gowns can be found through less narrow fashion choices, perhaps in the form of a navy wedding dress or a savvy pantsuit instead, saving on money and any anxiety over staining that perfectly white outfit with wedding cake frosting. Regarding the marital rings, engagement rings first represented purity markers for couples who were waiting until marriage to have sex, representing the social pressure of remaining sexually pure until marriage. Similarly, Brideswrites that the cringy garter toss tradition “originates from a time when the groom would tear off his wife's clothes and throw them out to his groomsmen as proof of communion.” As such, the garter toss is an uncomfortably voyeuristic practice that shallowly summarizes the male as a sex-driven maniac and the bride as an object of conquering. These various examples of symbolism represent how gender oppression, affected by societal norms and expectations, is rooted in traditional wedding rituals.
One of the most stressed elements of a Western marriage is the unity that marriage ignites between the couple. If marriage is unitive, then why separate aspects of the wedding into bride and groom categories? This division exists in part because of various aspects of gender oppression, particularly on the bride’s behalf. The idea that the bride belongs to other men rather than herself, accompanied by previously discussed issues of misogyny, constricts women to be passive objects of marriage rather than actively involved. The couple isn’t solely to blame as most couples follow traditional wedding rituals without questioning what these rituals truly mean and represent in terms of gender equality.
The wedding rituals discussed contribute to the widespread reinforcement of gender inequality, however subtly. The etiquette and customs of most traditional Western weddings are remarkably similar with little variation. That being said, these most commonly performed rituals are based on patriarchal notions with a foundation in gender oppression, often emphasizing women as subordinate to men. Additionally, these wedding types exaggerate both masculinity and femininity through differences in the bride and groom’s assigned rituals leading up to and during the wedding. Because of the desensitization created by a constant attendance of weddings, it becomes difficult to find these faults; “It's the bride's day”: The Paradox of Women's Emancipation authors write that “the displays of benevolent sexism are not viewed as sexism per se, because they are concealed in a benevolent fairy-tale discourse… The taken-for-granted discourses of the bride's day and the fairy-tale wedding help to induct women and men into the institution of marriage that is all too often deeply unequal.” Such discourse, however subtle or innocent, reinforces gender inequality. The expectation for weddings that encapsulate gender equality is not for the bride and groom to wear matching suits or for there to be “groomal” showers. Rather, the expectation is that an awareness of what certain traditional pre-wedding and wedding rituals represent can be used to create a wedding free from gender oppressive rituals so that a couple can begin their new life together in harmony and equality with one another.
